[SERVER-57880] Implement $top, $topN, $bottom, and $bottomN accumulators Created: 21/Jun/21 Updated: 29/Oct/23 Resolved: 20/Oct/21 |
|
| Status: | Closed |
| Project: | Core Server |
| Component/s: | None |
| Affects Version/s: | None |
| Fix Version/s: | 5.2.0 |
| Type: | Task | Priority: | Major - P3 |
| Reporter: | Mihai Andrei | Assignee: | Mickey Winters |
| Resolution: | Fixed | Votes: | 0 |
| Labels: | None | ||
| Remaining Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Time Spent: | Not Specified | ||
| Original Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Issue Links: |
|
||||
| Backwards Compatibility: | Fully Compatible | ||||
| Sprint: | QE 2021-08-09, QE 2021-08-23, QE 2021-09-06, QE 2021-09-20, QE 2021-10-04, QE 2021-10-18, QE 2021-11-01 | ||||
| Participants: | |||||
| Comments |
| Comment by Githook User [ 20/Oct/21 ] |
|
Author: {'name': 'Mickey. J Winters', 'email': 'mickey.winters@mongodb.com', 'username': 'mjrb'}Message: |
| Comment by Pawel Terlecki [ 02/Sep/21 ] |
|
I think you are right. It may be a premature optimization. In this case I see how it does not make sense to split this ticket. |
| Comment by Kyle Suarez [ 02/Sep/21 ] |
|
mickey.winters and I discussed this at top-n standup and sprint planning. With Mickey's current implementation, we are not sure if a more specialized version for top is going to be that much faster than the proposed plan for topN in the attached pull request. Our plan is to prioritize benchmarks for these accumulators in PERF-2486 and then use those perf numbers to see if we can gain a noticeable improvement. |
| Comment by Pawel Terlecki [ 02/Sep/21 ] |
|
For perf reasons, I feel that top and topN should have different implementations. Analogously, bottom and bottomN. Btw. after shipping time-series top and bottom turned out to be highly requested features as they are much faster than first and last if indexes are not available. Maybe it is worth splitting this ticket to two and shipping $top and $bottom first. cc: kyle.suarez |